Why So Many Different Christian Views?

I appreciate what you wrote, but I'm really not here to convince anyone of anything. I detest going round and round as if it were a sport. Truly, I don't understand the "debate" feel of Christian forums. It wears on me. So, because I am extremely busy, this is why I back out of conversations quickly.

Wikipedia is also nortoriously antiChristian. I would take those figures with a grain of salt and investigate it for yourself.

It's pretty simple, not everyone who says "the Holy Spirit taught me this" has truly heard from the Spirit. The Spirit can't contradict Himself so someone has to be right and someone wrong; this is unavoidable. A person just has to study the scriptures and pray that they won't be led into deception.

Nice

Biblical Aptitude Question: How many Israels does the Scripture speak of? A.) One B.) Two C.) Three D.) Unlimited

True.

I's very easy to mistake the voice of the Spirit for our own voice in our head or a thought planted by the enemy. I've had many powerful revelations which I thought sure was the Spirit but which turned out to be my own mind.

Unfortunately, some of the most influential Christian leaders these days are operating from their own minds claiming it's the Spirit. It's hard to spot the deception because the enemy doesn't use obvious lies, he's very smooth and crafty. Serious prayer and discernment are called for.

Consider few verses.

2 Thessalonians 2:8And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 9Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

a) Is this about a superhuman big A antichrist? or b) A warning to Christians about unsound doctrine?

I choose (b). It is consistent with the rest of the bible. No fuss no muss. The message of the bible becomes crystal clear. Seek the Sonship of God.
But a lot of the folks here, and in all christendom choose (b). A horror story meant for wayward children. Fables canonized by other fables. If one choses to listen to something other than the truth, it's logic will lead you down a rabbit hole reinforced by, forces of their own "synagogue of satan" - echo chambers of their own "assembly of worldly intellect".

The Bible demands obedience to the words and commands of the Scripture. But instead of reading and learning all the commands, people fill in the gaps with imagined things. What is this delusion that God sends them that reinforces the lie that they have embraced? It is rebuke from the Bible, the inspired words from above. Accept the righteous rebuke, the metal becomes refined. Reject the rebuke it becomes an accusation demanding defense from the echo chamber.

If you read that scripture correctly you would have easily determined that Peter sinned & drew Barnabas into it.
IDK why you can't see that.

There was NOT any pitting inspired word of two people in the story. No words from Peter at all. No argument. A rebuke from Paul for something Peter did, and Peter is silent thus Peter conceded immediately to Paul's point. No Pitting. This would be a good illustration of why people make mistakes in interpretation. They read things into the text that is not there.

To go about and say that Peter and Paul had an argument where Peter expressed a view or theological reasoning to support his position in this story would not be true. It would be imagined with no authority of scripture to support it.

Any natural reading of the text gives any reader the impression that Peter did something, (not said something) was rebuked for it, and that there was no argument or defense offered by Peter. We assume from the story that Peter and Barnabas were instantly in agreement with Paul about the negative nature of their actions and probably never did it again.

Accusing Peter of defending himself to Paul about his actions is not fair to Peter. If one sees him as inspired by the Holy Spirit then one should not accuse him of defending himself to Paul when according to the text it is more likely that Peter inspired by the Holy Spirit instantly felt the conviction when Paul spoke and agreed with the Holy Spirit in his heart that his actions did not match what he had previously preached about Gentiles being clean. Let us not accuse Peter of resisting the conviction of the Holy Spirit and launching a self willed defense of his actions stating that Peter had words with Paul when the text does not say that he did that.

Do you not see that you are accusing Peter of arguing with Paul when he did not. Trying to take Peter's side properly would be agreeing with Peter for his decision to not launch a defense and to concede to Paul's rebuke. That is taking Peter's side, not accusing Peter of arguing with Paul when he never did such a thing.


Gal 2:11
11When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.

Yes. The science is the list of rules. Rules to use when interpreting. The art comes into play in that there is a certain level of flexibility in applying the rules. Intuitive or common sense is the art part.

Do tell.

There is something you aren't realizing about 2ndTimothyGroup's position and how it pertains to the conversation. Look back through this chain to post 30.

Now look at this:
2TG literally believes that parts of scripture should be pitted against each other, and this commentary extends to what might appear like disagreements between 1 Peter/2 Peter and the writing attributed to Paul.

Look at this too:

He also spreads hateful antiChristian rhetoric:

To the point of writing lower-case "Christian" in more than one case:

So I ask you again, with this understanding/context of 2ndTimothyGroup, look back at post 30 in this thread:

Based on his posting history, he is likely not talking about a simple case of Peter being incorrect in that instance, he is seemingly weaving a pattern of raising doubt in scripture by pitting the words and reputations of different authors against each other. And beyond authors, he is also advocating for the idea that Christians don't have the Holy Spirit simply because they disagree at times (or make mistakes like Peter in Gal 2). This is coming from a user that accused Jesus Christ, God the Son, of lying.

It is clearly his position that he believes that differences in theology were an indication of lacking the Holy Spirit:

And when we compare it to this:

If he is correlating the presence of the Holy Spirit with the presence of sound knowledge, his comment is inferring that he believes Jews have the Holy Spirit and "white Christians of today" don't.

Pushing a "singular correct" interpretation at the expense of other valid interpretations is by its nature robbing from one to give to another. It's not that Peter and Paul necessarily ever had a disagreement or argument, but that doesn't stop people from using the words of different people to create a perception that two people are/were contrary to each other. And from there to create the false dichotomy of having to "choose" between one side or the other, when in fact there is no contradiction, it's just that the nuance is not understood.

2ndTimothyGroup is not an example of someone I would encourage anyone to take pointers from.

In a different part of this thread we have the short exchange between SomeDisciple and Runningman:

It comes to a question of whether a mistake is an indication of not "walking in the Spirit". If one falters, does that mean they are not walking in the Holy Spirit? Is it by a blip of that instance? Or in entirety (i.e. never was to begin with)? In retrospect, I think SomeDisciple was talking about a blip (in a Platonic sense of momentarily lapsing in the skill of something means that you wouldn't be acting as that thing), while Runningman was seemingly addressing the "in entirety" concept that users like 2ndTimothyGroup seemed to be presenting.

So we come to an interesting crossroads of how we approach the topic of "walking in the Spirit" and what exactly that means. I think different people are going to have different takes on the topic. But at the very least, we should acknowledge that Peter's momentary fault in Gal 2 should not be used as some sort of evidence that he was "not walking in the Spirit" in general. We should not rob the recognition of Peter's walk in the Spirit for the purpose to exult the recognition of Paul's walk in the Spirit.

There are people in the world that are completely willing to try to pit the teachings of Peter (1 Peter / 2 Peter) against Paul's to the point of suggesting "How can we say that the Bible is infallible if the Apostles couldn't agree?!" as 2ndGroupTimothy did.

To recap, I think you may have misunderstood my previous post. It wasn't talking about Gal 2, I was alluding to conversations and interpretation that occur around scripture and the ultimate undesirable nature of trying to make it seem like two apostles are against each other.

C'mon...

WALKING IN THE SPIRIT
16This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. 17For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. 18But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. 19Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. 22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.

25If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit

Peter gave into whatever fear he had concerning those of the circumcision and went against the truth he knew. He was not walking in the Spirit, or else he would have done the right thing from the beginning. "Not walking in the Spirit" basically means you are ignoring him.

1Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. 2Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. 3For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself. 4But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another. 5For every man shall bear his own burden.

Paul talks about this stuff in the same Epistle.

The point I'm presenting is an ontological dilemma.

1) At what point did Peter walk in the Spirit?
2) At what point did he cease walking in the Spirit? (If applicable)
3) And at what point did he resume? (If applicable)

Different people will have different answers to those three questions.

John 14:26 was written to the Apostles, not to every Christian of all ages. The Holy Spirit does enlighten us all only in ways to apply the Scriptures to our lives, not in the area of doctrines. We all are fallible human beings who comes from our culture, personal knowledge, learning ability and what we have been taught by other people. Thus We all are not perfect which is why many viewpoints exist. Some have come out of Cults which are false Christian Religions. Some may have come out of World Religions, others Atheistism and Secular mindsets. Hope this helps, Daniel

2 Peter 1
J.B. Phillips New Testament
1 1-2 Simon Peter, a servant and messenger of Jesus Christ, sends this letter to those who have been given a faith as valuable as yours in the righteousness of our God, and saviour Jesus Christ. May you know more and more of grace and peace as your knowledge of God and Jesus our Lord grows deeper.

God has done his part: see that you do yours
3-4 He has by his own action given us everything that is necessary for living the truly good life, in allowing us to know the one who has called us to him, through his own glorious goodness. It is through him that God’s greatest and most precious promises have become available to us men, making it possible for you to escape the inevitable disintegration that lust produces in the world and to share in God’s essential nature.

5-7 For this very reason you must do your utmost from your side, and see that your faith carries with it real goodness of life. Your goodness must be accompanied by knowledge, your knowledge by self-control, your self-control by the ability to endure. Your endurance too must always be accompanied by devotion to God; that in turn must have in it the quality of brotherliness, and your brotherliness must lead on to Christian love.

8-9 If you have these qualities existing and growing in you then it means that knowing our Lord Jesus Christ has not made your lives either complacent or unproductive. The man whose life fails to exhibit these qualities is short-sighted—he can no longer see the reason why he was cleansed from his former sins.

10-11 Set your minds, then, on endorsing by your conduct the fact that God has called and chosen you. If you go along the lines I have indicated above, there is no reason why you should stumble, and if you have lived the sort of life I have recommended God will open wide to you the gates of the eternal kingdom of our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ.

Truth will bear repetition
12-15 I shall not fail to remind you of things like this although you know them and are already established in the truth. I consider it my duty, as long as I live in the temporary dwelling of this body, to stimulate you by these reminders. I know that I shall have to leave this body at very short notice, as our Lord Jesus Christ made clear to me. Consequently I shall make the most of every opportunity, so that after I am gone you will remember these things.

The Scriptures is a Letter from God. I will paraphrase.
Seek the Father. You know who He is. Just follow the the Warm Feeling of Eternal Joy. But, if by unlucky chance you get lost, have no fear for you have an older brother. He gives wonderful advice, a mighty hero who will protect you and who will give you what you need when asked. You know him, he is calm one, calm as the nimbus he rides.